Personally I've got the typical 1.8 because of the price (used for about 70€).

Well... on the day my 5D Mark III came, my 50mm 1.8 II died. The front element fell off as a plastic part was broken and fell out on the floor and I couldn't find it anymore in order to find a way to repair the lens. Damned. OK... the 50mm 1.8 was a nice little lens with a great image quality but it's build quality... well... you just heard the story.

40mm 2.8 STM - pretty nice, sharp and small but shorter and "only" 2.8, not too expensive. It would look nice on the 5D3 with a battery grip attached 50mm 1.8 - like the 50mm 1.8 II but with a better build quality50mm 1.8 II - the one I had and just died, center sharpness was good50mm 2.5 Macro - well... I have a macro lens and 2.5 isn't really a bright lens but used it's not much more expensive than a 50mm 1.8 and it seems to have a pretty good sharpness and build quality and 2.5 is still OK - maybe that's the lens I'm looking for? I just didn't hear so much about it.50mm 1.4 USM - quite sharp, quite fast, payable but the AF seems to be it's weak point50mm 1.2L USM - pretty expensive, weather sealed, nice bokeh but not really sharp50mm 1.0L USM - hardly to get anywhere and pretty damn expensive and not sharp

Sigma 50mm 1.4 EX DG HSM - nice bokeh, good sharpness but many people seem to have focusing problems with it. But there are other people who are talking about focusing problems with the 50mm 1.8 II and I had none.

I even thought of a 85mm 1.8 USM for its image and build quality, its speed and as it's still payable. AND it's about the angle I'm used from my 50mm 1.8 II on my crop frame camera. But then... 85mm are pretty close to my 100mm lens...

Any more compatible AF lenses I just forgot?

OK, let's get the list a bit shorter... although I really liked my 50mm 1.8 II I'm not going to get another 50mm 1.8 II. I'm not always so nice to my equipment but it should at least survive. A small plastic part killing the lens is not good. I'm not going to get the 50mm 1.0 - just not sharp and much too expensive. I'll leave those to the collectors. The 50mm 1.2 is pretty expensive as well and not as sharp as the 50mm 1.4 (although the 1.2 has a nicer bokeh) but for that amount of money it just doesn't feel "enough" if I can get a cheaper lens with only few disadvantages but also advantages over the much more expensive one.So I guess the short list:50mm 1.850mm 2.5 Macro50mm 1.4 USMSigma 50mm 1.4 EX DG HSMaaaand... last but not least the cheap, sharp and very small 40mm 2.8.

Usually I find a lens, think "Wow!" or "Naaa..." and decide whether I need it or not. But this time I think I need some advice, some talk about the lenses. I have to admit: I'm especially kinda interested in the 50mm 2.5. Has anyone here ever tested it? But then the 50mm 1.4 is close to two stops faster!

I researched this at length when looking for a portrait prime for my crop body. All the 50mm lenses have problems

50mm 1.8 - sharp but flimsy plastic, breaks if you drop it50mm 2.5 Macro - very sharp, but as it's a macro lens it has a long focus travel and is therefore slow to AF50mm 1.4 USM - a lot say not sharp till stopped down (some say to f/4) and has hybrid USM which contains plastic gears which strip and break if you knock the front element.Sigma 50mm 1.4 EX DG HSM - front/back focussing issues

The 85mm is a great lens, great IQ, real Ring USM and a perfect portrait lens now you have moved to a FF body.

Now is the time to ditch 50mm and go for the 35L f/1.4 & 85 f/1.8 combo that your 5DIII deserves.

I take it AF is a requirement? The options seem pretty much covered. I think it boils down to:

Canon 50mm f/1.4 - if you don't want to spend a lot.Canon 50mm f/1.2 - if you can spend a lot.Sigma 50mm f/1.4 - the focusing issue is due to focus shift. If you can use it only wide open you can adjust it out, and stopped down a lot the DoF increases enough to compensate. The problem then is if you want to stop down a little, focus shift can mess up the AF. For this reason it wouldn't be on my short list.

I'd also suggest thinking more about the 85mm f/1.8. The aperture does make a difference even if you might think it similar to the 100mm macro. The 40mm pancake is a nice lens, but to me it's a different application.

When I asked "what 50mm" a long time ago, I ended up with the Zeiss 50mm f/2 makro. No AF here though.

the 85 1.8 is way better to use than the 50 1.8. I like using it and if your main aim is a portrait lens, its awesome. Sometimes I find it over exposes a bit, but do go down 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop on a bright day and its fine.But would suggest that its a bit long if you are used to a 50. The 30 1.4 Sigma has become my most used prime on the 7D, so I can understand that the 50 is a good length for the 5dIII.

Now is the time to ditch 50mm and go for the 35L f/1.4 & 85 f/1.8 combo that your 5DIII deserves.

Well - the 35mm isn't interesting for me. At least not at the moment. It's a lot of money for a focal length I don't really like. I had some walks with that camera+lens:

And I always thought something like "Waaaaahhh... for some things the lens is not wide enough and for some it just doesn't have the reach I need" - and inbetween I find nothing that it could be interesting for, maybe apart from full body portraits. And that's the main reason why I'll just get the 40mm 2.8 STM from my list - the focal length is just too similarBut if I want to use 35mm I could just...

Yeah, no AF. But at 35mm 2.8 I can live without it, especially when I hardly ever use this focal length.And you know what? That lens just feels absolutely great! Smooth focus ring, metal body, nice rubber - great. Feels much better than most of my EF lenses.

popo wrote:

I take it AF is a requirement? The options seem pretty much covered.

Why doesn't Tamron make 50mm lenses...? Well... I'd pretty much prefer an AF lens unless I can get a (good) 50mm 1.4 M42 lens for less money than a used 50mm 1.8 (I).

Quote:

Canon 50mm f/1.4 - if you don't want to spend a lot.Canon 50mm f/1.2 - if you can spend a lot.

Well... I just bought a 5D Mark III - there's no money left at the moment. In order to be able to buy the 50mm 1.2 I'd have to save my money quite a lot of months.

Quote:

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 - the focusing issue is due to focus shift. If you can use it only wide open you can adjust it out, and stopped down a lot the DoF increases enough to compensate. The problem then is if you want to stop down a little, focus shift can mess up the AF. For this reason it wouldn't be on my short list.

Well... OK, I'll cut it from the list.

maxjj wrote:

But would suggest that its a bit long if you are used to a 50.

I'm used to a 50mm on a crop sensor. I only shot about 5 photos on the 5D3, then the lens fell apart

I would think the 5D3's high ISO ability shoud compensate well enough for that.

Indeed. The thing is... Now I have a full frame camera but no lens that offers a really shallow depth of field unless I shoot portraits with my (100-)400mm (4.5-)5.6 from quite a distance or my 100mm 2.8 from quite a low distance.

And the thought about how the 35mm felt I guess 40mm isn't the perfect focal length for me. OK, the lens is just small and has a good image quality so I guess it can be a lot of fun but yeah... it's not really what I'm looking for at the moment.

So my list at the moment...

50mm 1.8 (I)50mm 1.485mm 1.8

The 50mm 2.5 could be the perfect lens for my nephew who neither has a portrait lens nor a macro lens and I think the 2.5 is a cheap (when used) compromise for both situations. (Damned. My nephew is just 11 and owns a 60D! But his lenses... 18-55mm IS II, Tamron 28-200mm and some of his grandfather's FD lenses with an adapter... Yeah, I guess the 50mm 2.5 would be a great solution for him.)